AMD Radeon Linux Gaming Performance At Parity Between KDE Plasma 6.0 X11 vs. Wayland

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • qarium
    Senior Member
    • Nov 2008
    • 3438

    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    server and server development is a completely different software stack with very different requirements than the consumer/client side software stack. And Linux owns effectively 100% of both.
    linux/x11 for the serverside
    the servers in 99,9% all cases do not run x11 server. and as mrg666 already said even if you use it as a software the server does not run the xserver oly the clind side runs a xserver.


    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    android Linux/surface flinger for the clientside.
    how exactly is android x11 if they do not use x11 at all ? there is maybe a x11 emulator on andorid play store...

    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    apple does have a meaningful share of the client side - some 10 or 20% of devices now,
    x11 on appple is like openGL on apple only legacy apps use it and absolut no commercial software just some outdated opensource apps like GIMP...

    Originally posted by mSparks View Post

    microsoft has drifted into oblivion, some 300 million barely used devices out of 10s of billions of devices used daily.
    There is a microsoftie tendancy to exclude the 99.99% of devices people use on a daily basis when claiming relevance, but the truth is they lost mind share a long time ago - MS purchases of minecraft, linkedin and recently activision blizzard were prime examples of trying to buy their way back into the market.
    microsoft is in a very good position with these games if i install people linux on their computer because the hardware is to old for windows11 because it has not TPM2.0 module then they expect Microsoft-Minecraft to run on linux or else linux would be total failure for them.

    "activision blizzard"

    here i have to tell you something very special all the Blizzard games i played over 20-25 years ago like warcraft1/2 and Starcraft1/2 are not on Steam
    the point that microsoft did buy this shit company changes this microsoft does in fact also sell games on steam. many microsoft games run on steam deck for example.

    activision-blizzard was very hostil against valve steam customers microsoft is maybe evil but they love money more and thats why they sell on steam and sell games for steam deck.

    this means microsoft is a bad and evil company but activision and blizzard where even more evil than microsoft...

    just see world of warcraft blizzard had a internal native linux clind for world of warcraft but they did never offer this linux clind to customers outside of their company.

    Originally posted by mSparks View Post
    I have nothing "against" wayland in that sense, the idea is a good one - but to succeed it needs to actually be better, and there is no evidence it passes even that basic hurdle.
    wayland won for only 1 reason it provides the relevant features like VRR and HDR on the Valve Steam Deck.
    also Wine/Proton also won because of the steam deck...
    you only need 1 successful devise in the market and you won.. because keep in mind X11 has ZERO successful devices in the market.

    steam deck sells more than any laptops and notebooks with linux together just keep this in mind. and many of these notebooks no longer come with x11.-
    Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

    Comment

    • Panix
      Senior Member
      • Sep 2007
      • 1555

      Originally posted by WileEPyote View Post

      Nothing is preventing someone else from taking over on x11 development. Nobody seems to want to.
      So what? If everyone is working on Wayland or wants to implement Wayland (it doesn't mean it's a good idea), why would anyone keep up with X11 development?

      Wayland sounds like it still has a number of issues - and what do I read here, that it's been 15 years plus in development? LOL!

      Comment

      • oiaohm
        Senior Member
        • Mar 2017
        • 8419

        Originally posted by Panix View Post
        So what? If everyone is working on Wayland or wants to implement Wayland (it doesn't mean it's a good idea), why would anyone keep up with X11 development?
        The reality is if you plan is not to migrate to Wayland and stay on X11 the issue of lack maintenance of X11 bare metal is going to come a problem.

        Originally posted by Panix View Post
        Wayland sounds like it still has a number of issues - and what do I read here, that it's been 15 years plus in development? LOL!
        After 30 years of development X11 it self still has major issues.
        There are potential security vulnerabilities involved with the X11 X server and the Common Desktop Environment (CDE).

        I really like AIX with the first instruction being " Removing the /etc/rc.dt file" if you perform this you disable X11 and CDE on AIX completely.

        Active development of Wayland does mean issues can still be addressed. X11 bare metal we are seeing development drop off this once it fully does stop this means what ever issues it has you will be stuck with forever more.

        There is the problem with parties on the attempting to sell the X11 side not know the limitations/defects of the X11 side so going on claiming a feature X11 itself really does not have.

        Like GLX of X11 is really a failure. GLX over network does not work because its a 1 to 1 encoding of opengl and opengl is way to chatty so it preform absolutely horrible as it attempt to send too much backwards and forwards over network . GLX locally you are still doing 1 to 1 encoding of opengl to GLX opcode for upto max of Opengl 2.1 this end up being a pointless waste of CPU time because you have to re-code into what ever the local GPU supports anyhow. This is why a lot of modern applications under X11 use EGL that local only instead of GLX.


        Yes work virtualgl is based on from early 2000 detail that GLX over network was a bad idea.


        The reality is most of X11 Network Transparency like it or not does not work. Even worse most of the network transparency of X11 end up making local operations slower and consumer more CPU than they need to be.

        Wayland protocol has limitations but so does X11 protocol. We are seeing people attempting to extend the Wayland protocol to overcome Wayland limitations. With X11 protocol we are not really seeing people attempting to fix X11 protocol issues. Problem is to fix lots of X11 core issues would basically equal scrap X11 and make Wayland anyhow. There is simple point here you don't want to be doing operations optimized for network when you are running locally as this is just going to be slower than it should be. Also you don't want to do something optimized for local over network because this will also end badly due to not being able to cope with the latency going over network causes.

        Comment

        • WileEPyote
          Senior Member
          • Nov 2023
          • 223

          Originally posted by Panix View Post
          So what? If everyone is working on Wayland or wants to implement Wayland (it doesn't mean it's a good idea), why would anyone keep up with X11 development?

          Wayland sounds like it still has a number of issues - and what do I read here, that it's been 15 years plus in development? LOL!
          What's your point? x11 has been around 30 and still has issues too.

          All this arguing over it is stupid and tiring.

          There are 2 major facts right now. x11 is no longer in active development. Wayland is in active development. Who, what, when, where, and why just don't matter at this point. This is the current state of affairs, period. It doesn't matter at all how anyone feels about it.

          So, my very valid point is: There is only one way to change that. Taking action.

          Endlessly bitching about it is not taking action. They either need to take up active development of x11 again, come up with another alternative, or just deal with the current state of affairs.

          We sure as fuck don't need to hear more endless arguments over how wayland sucks at this, and x11 sucks at that. The people bitching about EITHER one need to do something to fix them, or stfu already. This thread is already 12 pages long of the same fucking arguments going around in endless circles as just about every other thread that mentions one or the other. It's completely fucking stupid at this point.

          You hate x11? Fine, don't use it. Help out with wayland. Code, bug reports, feature requests, whatever.

          You hate wayland? Also fine, don't use it. You're in a tougher spot though, as if you want x11 to keep going, you need to find a way to get it in active development again. Fork it, talk a bunch of programmer buddies into helping? I don't know. It won't be easy, but maybe it would be worth doing if x11 means that much to you.

          I said it before in this thread. Use what works for you. If wayland doesn't do what a person wants, they can use x11. If x11 doesn't do what a person wants, they can use wayland.

          Comment

          • mSparks
            Senior Member
            • Oct 2007
            • 2065

            Originally posted by WileEPyote View Post

            as if you want x11 to keep going, you need to find a way to get it in active development again. Fork it,
            I'm struggling to understand your logic​

            what you seem to be saying is something along the lines of

            if you want http to keep going, you need to find a way to get it in active development again. Fork it.

            This makes my head explode.

            Comment

            • oiaohm
              Senior Member
              • Mar 2017
              • 8419

              Originally posted by mSparks View Post
              if you want http to keep going, you need to find a way to get it in active development again. Fork it.
              In reality that is how http and html development works. New features to http and html have always appeared in a one of the browser or server implementations first very commonly a fork of one of these implementations then after it proven to work ratified into the standards then implemented by everyone else.

              This is why the argument at Wayland compositors are too fragmented have limited value. Http and Html development is fragmented development right to the point of people implement forks with no other reason but to demo new features and functionality and after the feature is mainlined that project dies..

              The most active time of X11 protocol development is also the time there was the most X11 server implementations.

              mSparks there were other examples you could have chosen that are not fragmented development. Other ones that people know about that is major fragmented development is linux kernel and postgresql. Core feature of Git itself it to make forking something simpler.

              Open Source Projects with major active development forks appearing are common why because some active developer has a disagreement with another active developer and they want to prove their point by implementing and showing that what they believe is right is right. No new forks is a sign a open source project may be in development trouble. Please note "may be" there are exceptions yet you failed to name one.

              Comment

              • mSparks
                Senior Member
                • Oct 2007
                • 2065

                Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

                In reality that is how http and html development works. New features to http and html have always appeared in a one of the browser or server implementations first very commonly a fork of one of these implementations then after it proven to work ratified into the standards then implemented by everyone else.
                so by your reckoning http is dead and the internet will die soon.

                This also makes my head explode.

                Especially when to me, the opposite seems to be true in practice, e.g. new uses for http emerge all the time, X11 applications support HDR, VRR and vulkan explicit sync, but wayland ones dont yet.

                Comment

                • oiaohm
                  Senior Member
                  • Mar 2017
                  • 8419

                  Originally posted by mSparks View Post
                  Especially when to me, the opposite seems to be true in practice, e.g. new uses for http emerge all the time, X11 applications support HDR, VRR and vulkan explicit sync, but wayland ones dont yet.
                  X11 explicit sync for vulkan is not merged for bare metal branch yet. Xwayland branch has it merged so it for Wayland users first.




                  X11 server and X11 protocol don't support HDR. This is a Wayland only feature. There is no such thing as X11application that in fact correctly support HDR.

                  So out of three features 2 are in fact at this stage Wayland only. VRR is supported by Wayland these days.

                  Comment

                  • mSparks
                    Senior Member
                    • Oct 2007
                    • 2065

                    Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

                    X11 explicit sync for vulkan is not merged for bare metal branch yet.
                    It doesn't need to be, any more than your personal website needs merging into the http standard.
                    Not least because X11 was always HDR then downscaled to whatever color palette the display supported. Can't remember if its 16bits or 32bit per color, think its FP32 per channel.

                    Wayland doesn't even support color management yet.

                    Originally posted by oiaohm View Post
                    X11 server and X11 protocol don't support HDR.
                    It does, and has since nvidia driver version 545.23.06
                    Last edited by mSparks; 20 April 2024, 03:46 PM.

                    Comment

                    • oiaohm
                      Senior Member
                      • Mar 2017
                      • 8419

                      Originally posted by mSparks View Post

                      It doesn't need to be, any more than your personal website needs merging into the http standard.
                      Not least because X11 was always HDR then downscaled to whatever color palette the display supported. Can't remember if its 16bits or 32bit per color, think its FP32 per channel.

                      Wayland doesn't even support color management yet.

                      It does, and has since nvidia driver version 545.23.06
                      Read prior post links because arch site and the maintainer of X11 server on bare metal tells you that it does not. Nvidia HDR support only works with Wayland compositor.
                      • HDR capable graphics driver: AMDGPU and NVIDIA (550.54.14+) are confirmed to work.
                      https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/HDR_monitor_support

                      545.23.06 Nvidia for HDR does not in fact work. Yes Nvidia introduced the feature in that version but the implementation is bugged until 550.54.14+ using prior to this will lead to black screens of death.

                      No matter how you argue the reality is that one of the X11 maintainers.


                      (right now you need to get the window contents from its corresponding Pixmap, and Pixmaps can't be larger than 32bpp...).
                      Why is this a problem. HDR 30 bit per pixel right. There is something mSparks you have missed. If the output is 30 bit and the pixmap can store only 32bpp where are you going to put the alpha channel data. The data defining transparency when you composite windows with each other.

                      Alpha channel data does not get sent to the monitor. 24 bit display output need 32 bits of pixel storage so you can have a 8bit alpha channel. So a 30 bit per pixel hdr output need a 40bits per pixel storage to have 10 bit alpha even 8 bit alpha the result it it does not fit.


                      Monitor HDR normally 10 bit per channel. They had to make it fit in a 32 bit transfer limit. That only leaves 2 bits for alpha

                      Yes RGBA what applications output RGB what you send to monitor. Compositor in the middle processes the alpha bit out of existence before sending result to monitor.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X